Sony a6000 Review

Sony's NEX-6 was a departure from the company's usual lineup of mirrorless cameras when it was introduced in the Fall of 2012. It slotted in between the various NEX-5 models and the NEX-7, and staked out a middle ground between the two, aiming to offer an accessible camera that offered a strong feature set for photographers. So you got a small camera with an electronic viewfinder and a degree of direct control. To this the NEX-6 offered two things that were yet to appear on any Sony mirrorless camera: an exposure mode dial and an ISO-standard hot shoe.

The new a6000 sits in the same place in Sony's mirrorless lineup and offers a broadly similar feature set, but adds a number of significant new features (while also losing the NEX moniker of its predecessor). The resolution and processor have been bumped up, the most notable feature on the a6000 is its updated Hybrid AF system.

Where the NEX-6 had 99 phase-detect points covering approximately 50% of the sensor, the a6000 has 179, with 92% coverage - by far the most comprehensive of any contemporary camera. This, combined with the new Bionz X processor, allows the camera to shoot continuously at 11 fps with subject tracking, according to Sony. The company also claims that the a6000 has the fastest AF performance on the market, though those statements should always be taken with a grain of salt.

The only major losses are that the a6000 utilizes Sony's lower resolution, SVGA viewfinder, rather than its top-end XGA panel. It also loses the NEX-6's level gauge - which seems like an odd thing to remove, just to help it hit a lower price point. However, those cost-cutting measures seem to have worked: the a6000's list price is $100 lower, at $649, than the NEX-6's was at launch.

The major changes here are related to the sensor. The new 24 megapixel 'Exmor APS HD' CMOS sensor has on-chip phase detection like its predecessor, but it covers a much larger area of the frame. Sony promises better AF tracking, especially when shooting continuously. The a6000 uses Sony's latest image processor - Bionz X - which touts improved detail and smarter noise reduction as improvements.

While the specs of the a6000's movie mode aren't a whole lot different from the NEX-6, users now have access to a zebra pattern (a live exposure warning that can be set to indicate a chosen brightness level), and can output 'clean' video over HDMI. The menus have switched to the new 'Alpha' style found on the a7 and a7R (for better or for worse), and the camera can now be controlled via a Mac or PC over a USB connection. The Wi-Fi feature is about the same as on the NEX-6, offering remote control from a smart device, the ability to transfer images from the camera and options for uploading to the cloud, across Wi-Fi networks. The camera can also download and run Sony's feature-enhancing 'Playmemories Apps' of which there are an increasing number.

Hybrid AF System

If there's one area that makes the a6000 stand out from the crowd, it's the camera's improved AF system. While the 25-point contrast detect part of the system remains the same, the number of phase-detect points has increased from 99 to 179 since the NEX-6. All of those extra phase detect points give you a much wider coverage area: roughly 92% of the frame, compared to around 50%. The benefit? A wider area that lets phase detection autofocus do what it does best: track moving subjects.

Bionz X Processor

The company's latest 'Bionz X' processor is considerably more powerful than the previous generation, allowing what the company says will be more sophisticated processing.

Sony is being a little vague on specifics, but is touting the new processor as offering 'Detail Reproduction Technology' which appears to be a more subtle and sophisticated sharpening system. The company promises less apparent emphasis on edges, giving a more convincing representation of fine detail.

Another function promised by the Bionz X processor is 'Diffraction Reduction', in which the camera's processing attempts to correct for the softness caused by diffraction as you stop a lens' aperture down. This processing is presumably aperture-dependent and sounds similar to an element of Fujifilm's Lens Modulation Optimization system (introduced on the X100S), and, as we predicted when we first saw it here, it's subsequently appeared across several brands, including Olympus.

Finally, Sony says the Bionz X chip offers a more advanced version of its context-sensitive, 'area-specific noise reduction', which attempts to identify whether each area of an image represents smooth tone, textured detail or subject edges, and then apply different amounts of noise reduction accordingly.

Compared to a5000 and NEX-6

While most of the changes on the a6000 are for the better, there are a few things that have gone the other way compared to the NEX-6. For the sake of comparison we've also thrown in the a6000's step-down model, the a5000.

a5000

NEX-6

a6000

Resolution

20.1MP

16.1MP

24.3MP

Processor

Bionz X

Bionz

Bionz X

AF system (contrast/phase)

25 / 0 point

25 / 99 point

25 / 179 point

ISO range

100-16000

100-25600

100-25600

LCD design (tilt up/down)

Tilting (180° up)

Tilting (90°/45°)

Tilting (90°/45°)

EVF type / resolution

None

OLED / 2.36M dot

OLED / 1.44M dot

EVF magnification (equiv.)

N/A

0.73x

0.70x

On-screen level gauge

No

Yes

No

Max burst rate

4 fps

10 fps

11 fps

Video resolution

1080/60i/24p

1080/60p/24p

1080/60p/24p

Zebra pattern

Yes

No

Yes

Clean HDMI output

No

No

Yes

PC remote

No

No

Yes

Battery life (CIPA)

420 shots

360 shots

360 shots

In most respects, the Alpha 6000 is a big step up from the NEX-6 - the slightly smaller, lower resolution viewfinder is the only major step down in the specification.

As you'd expect, the a6000 is considerably more capable than the lower-cost a5000, unless you want a 180 degree flip-up screen. The trade-off for that feature is the lack of an EVF.

Kit options and pricing

The a6000 is available in silver or black, at a price of $649/£589/€649 for the body and $799/£719/€799 for a kit including the 16-50mm F3.5-5.6 power zoom lens.

The a6000 is available in silver or black

Accessories of note include an 'active sling bag', screen protector, and body case. Some users may also be interested in the BC-VW1 external charger, as Sony only includes a USB charger in the box.

If you're new to digital photography you may wish to read the Digital Photography Glossary before diving into this article (it may help you understand some of the terms used).

Conclusion / Recommendation / Ratings are based on the opinion of the reviewer, you should read the ENTIRE review before coming to your own conclusions.

We recommend to make the most of this review you should be able to see the difference (at least) between X,Y and Z and ideally A,B and C.

This article is Copyright 2014 and may NOT in part or in whole be reproduced in any electronic or printed medium without prior permission from the author.

Comments

I have been testing an A6000 with the two kit zoom lenses at a very competitive price; 649€. I have been using my small A37 for 5 years, which is a light camera with good performance with my old K-M lenses. My first disappointment was the pixelated viewfinder. Both, the A37 and A6000 EV have the same resolution (1,44Mp) with similar enlargement, but the A6000 uses an OLED design, while the A37 uses LCD. Perhaps the A37 EV includes a diffuser screen, but I prefer its smooth and lower contrast LCD appearance.Some other things my A37 has, but not found in the A6000; in body stabilisation IBIS, MIC input, MF/AF switch, dedicated buttons like; D-preview, EV/monitor, KM flash shoe.Trying to use my KM lenses I need an LA-EA3 or 4 adapter, but none of them use the on sensor PDAF. Then, the only compatibility is with the FW-50 battery and SD card.The A6500 adds IBIS, 4K and touchscreen, but it is 1000€ more expensive. No need to switch to A6 series.

Hello, I'm an amateur photographer looking to expand into the world of interchangeable lenses and DSLRs. I've only ever used point and shoot cameras as it's all I can afford (currently using the Canon PowerShot SX400) and I have to save up for a new camera. I'm looking for something that can high quality, professional-looking photos. I mainly shoot nature/landscapes but am interested in learning portrait photography. Is the a6000 capable of putting out image quality like that? Can I get large prints of photos that come out at excellent quality? I understand that the a6000 is a crop sensor, and are disadvantaged when compared to full frames, which can pull in much higher quality photos and better colouring, focus, etc. I'm considering on whether I should invest in the a6000 or a full frame. Any recommendations?

I am now using A6000 and I got speedlight Phottix for Canon. Can I use this Phottis for Canon to my A6000 with full functionality. Or, if not what should I add to be able to use this Phottix to to A6000. Can I use it as slave?

No, the hot shoes of Sony Flash is completely different from Canon or other brand so you must buy made-for-Sony flash or used flash for another system with an flash shoes adapter. Still not fully functionality.

A number of times I have heard that a prime lens will do a better job than the kit lens.

I am only interested in shooting video. HD video is 2Mpixels vs stills which are 24Mpixels. Therefore it would seem reasonable to assume that when capturing at 1/10th the native resolution, there would be no benefit in upgrading to a lens that can deliver more detail than the kit lens. To what degree might that statement represent reality ?

Not specifically Prime. Prime means fixed focal length (not a zoomable lens). The kit lens isn't bad, and if you think it looks good, that's all that matters. That being said, any higher quality lens could be better visually. Optical quality always matters more than resolution (pixels). Better quality glass results in better images period.

Think of it this way: if you wear foggy glasses you don't see as well as with freshly cleaned glasses. Cheaper lenses are like foggy glasses; they don't give you the clearest image you can see optically. Good lenses can give better clarity, faster focus, and better color representation.

I've had my a6000 since March. Can only compare with previous point and shoot cameras (e.g Canon SX230HS). Decided to forego the kit zoom and invested in the Sony 35 mm F1.8 prime instead based on the reviews in order to maximize image quality. I think that the combination gives you the best quality that can be had at the price point for a mirrorless camera and on par with similarly priced DSLRs. I don't have much experience, but I am very pleased with the images that the camera has been able to capture. The level of detail in the pictures more than compensates for not having the flexibility of a zoom lens. I have posted some of the better pictures at https://www.dpreview.com/galleries/2798743242.

Bloody hell. So many people posting here and they have absolutely no clue about how to use a camera and they blame the camera for taking bad photos.Perhaps, it would help to actually learn how to take photos first before buying expensive equipment and expecting great results?No wonder some people think iPhone cameras are great *sigh*

I cannot agree more. Most people just cannot use this camera. They expect the camera can take good picture by itself. If I give you Nikon D5 to these peopel, they will still not be able to take good pictures. I have encountered so many people like this. Even some middle age guys whom I met in front of Eiffel tower with his big camera and big lenses. He had no clue on how to use his camera. So we can imagine, people who just got into A6000. A6000 is not a point and shoot camera.

Many people are so lazy that they will make no attempt to learn the basics of photography and god forbid if they then must learn how to use their camera.......they should consider taking a drawing class.

1. I like my a6000 but still have some problems with it's startup times. What is the real key to start up with 0s delay?

2. My RX100 is a wonderful camera.Just imagine what a marvellous machine it could be with a fix lens!!!Do you think Sony will make a fix lens "RZ100" with a super grip and maybea little tweek with the small buttons, WITHOUT making the camera bigger?Maybe the ON button could be removed too and be exchanged with an OFFbutton to save battery! Just shoot to start if the lens does not need to pull out!What a killer street camera, or what do you think?I would love this camera instead of buying (by all means a good one, Ricoh GR)Br// Tomas

Don't forget the initial investment in the camera/lens kit to go with it, as well as the outlay of cash to obtain a book such as David Busch's to serve as a full feature manual (that Sony doesn't make available even online) being needed to fully use the equipment.

Also don't forget that places like Amazon don't have Busch's book in stock, and the only used copies are more than 500 bucks to get them. Plus your local library will probably also only be able to offer a log in, view while on-line copy of Busch's book.

A total shame, as I am already producing much improved pictures using this camera instead of my old point and shoot.

Could someone suggest really good A6000 lenses, much better than one which come with it? I am thinking of maybe one small (around 16-50) and a good zoom 10-15x one. Are Tamaron 18-200 or Sigma 18-250 or 18-270 much better? I am an amateur coming from Canon G15. Need something fairly inexpensive and light.

After many years I finally decided to move up from my Canon point and shoot. I did all the online research I could find and eventually decided on the A6000 which was more than I could really afford. After a year of use this is the most disappointing camera purchase I have ever made. I predominantly take landscape photos, country, forest and seascapes. In all automatic modes the images are invariably blurry with inconsistent exposure in bright sunlight even when taking five photos of same subject without changing settings.I have tried manual focus using both view finder and the rear display...the focus always appears excellent but the photo is always blurry once you zoom in. The camera now remains mostly unused in a drawer and I use my iPhone 4 which produces better and more consistent photos. I have checked all the forums for suggestions and tried everything without success. Would welcome any suggestions before this expensive mistake remains in the drawer forever. Disappointed user.

Well your response was zero help. Update, lens had an intermittent fault and after two rebuilds was replaced under warranty. Body also was faulty and replaced, something to do with electronics. I now have a working camera but have yet to be able to reproduce the crisp images from these reviews. Will not bother providing a further update.

I have purchased three A-6000 Sony cameras in the past few months. We are on a two and a half month photo and tourist trip to the western US.I was having trouble with the on & off switch being very hard to turn off and on. Now it is locked up solid. Cannot turn it on or off.

The second A-6000 now has discontinued functioning also. So pleased with the quality of the photos we were getting before, the camera's weight and ease of using all the features. However, now every time I turn on the camera, it will do NOTHING but display the error message, "Writing to the memory card was not completed correctly. Recover data?" When I then select 'Enter' , it says " Execute? This may damage data that was added or edited on another device." Then when I select "Enter" it reads "Reinsert the memory card that you were using." I have done this twenty or more times and many times with a new Sony card and can never get past this message. Very unhappy user.

My A6000 with stock lens often takes blurry photos; I've disabled the Long Exposure Noise Reduction feature, and steady shot is enabled; angle is Wide, Auto Focus is enabled, as is AF Illuminator, but the problem still exists. I have 2 kids that frequently spring into action, and I want to capture the scene. What's the best walking around setting to keep the camera on to capture clear stills, as well as movement when it presents itself? I'm using the a6000 with stock 16-50 lens and firmware 2.02. Thank you

some times performance is rated in a given time context: when rating "video mode", "features"or "Low light / high ISO performance" on a 2010 camera and it gets a 70% rating, a 2015 camera with the same performance wouldnt even get 40% as a new scale had to be adopted in order to keep the rating values on the chart.I suggest you go to the review of the nex 5n, and compare the iso / noise performance side to side with the a6000. that will give you a better idea of the performance difference between the two models

I am confused with all the reviews out there. I am stuck between Nikon D5500 and Sony A6000. I understand that investment in lenses for Sony is costlier but can I just buy adapter and use Nikon/Canon lenses ?

I am a beginner and this would be my first DSLR. I read a lot about mirrorless is the future, how true it is ?

D5500 & A6000Both camera you mentioned is basically the same. Both are DSLR camera with more auto controls. If you have to choose one from them, should go for A6000 but I don't encourage using Nikon/Canon lenses with adapter. Suggestion:If you are a beginner and want to learn how to control a camera to shoot and get pictures in your own ideas (more creative and unique than built in auto modes offer), you should go for Nikon D7100/7200 OR 70D/7Di/7Dii in Canon. They offer full manual control and allow you to learn fully how to control camera freely. FYI, these cameras also have full auto mode if you want just easy shoot sometimes.Mirrorless is future:Yes, i agree on that bcos the quality of photo they produce can match with DSLR since A6000 come out. The only difference is technology and Mirrorless cameras has less weight & less manual control.

The a6000 has just as much (or maybe even more, due to focus peeking) manual control as my Canon 5D had. Plus, there's the option to buy adapters and use almost every lens ever created, thereby adding even further manual control, via older manual lenses. The a6000 is a brilliant device, and a beginner should have zero qualms about starting with it.

I always read reviews before making a decision but sometimes, advice is needed. I am not a pro photographer (maybe semi-pro one day), but I demand high image quality. If it's not clear and sharp, no one will ever see it but me. I love Zeiss lenses. So, I am been a p&s man who just shot a wedding with the groom's EOS 10D. Don't laugh but my current cameras are Sony's DSC WX80(Zeiss lens) and WX350(Sony lens) It's time to move forward. My question is : EOS 70D or A6000? Manual Settings, I am slowly learning. I do mostly parties/events including live music in dimly lit environments. but, I take a picture or video of everything I can (I like pictures) Any advice will be appreciated and helpful. Thank you for your time.

Depends on your budget. If you have limited funds then the A6000 is going to stretch your budget further with more lenses- like a short prime for shooting groups and a 60mm prime for actions shots of people in low light. Don't worry about the name on the lens- go read tests (photozone) and user reviews (B&H). Both cameras have the speed and AF to suit you. Another difference is size: If it is your only camera being able to mount the compact kit lens on the A6000 makes for a MUCH smaller to-go camera, even in a jacket pocket. Good luck!

I have just ordered a A6000, 18-55 SAM DT lens and PK to NEX adapter. That lens is just so I would have at least one native lens (and it was dirt cheap). The real reason I ordered this body was because I have some archaic glass in the form of old school Pentax K mount manual prime lenses:

I'm a zero knowledge about camera ( Please i mean ZERO). I want to buy a camera for my lovely daughter for Christmas gift. I read the review (Sony A 6000, it fit my budget to compare with Cannon D-70 too expensive, still don't have the right answer for my question which i have in mind. I would like to post my questions here , please somebody help: * If the camera has feature as video , could it video long 1 hour for wedding ? *What should i have the lens for the camera, which could do the job such as: - Wide angle - Portrait - video filming - sports They all fours in one or do i have to buy 02 difference lenses Thank you so much for helping me

I don't shoot video much so I don't know, but it should be able to take a long video with a class 10, 64 GB card. You should update the firmware to the lastest one to unlock super high bit rate video recording XAVSC.

About the lens, should get the SEL 35f1.8 for general purpose event and indoor shooting. It is an excellent lens. Please see YouTube review about this lens.

For sport, you can get the SEL 70-200 F4. Very expensive, but will get the job done.

Wide angle, short zoom range, and walk around lens, get the SEL 1670z. Can't beat the Zeiss optics. Please buy directly from Sony to avoid bad copies of these lens. An alternative to this is the SELP 18-105G lens. It is cheaper.

The kit lens is good if you want to put the camera into your jacket pocket.

There are manuals about the sony a6000 system on amazon. Should take a look at that if you intend to but the camera.

No, you can not do a 1 hour video with a still camera. the law will only allow 29 mins. at most. With the a6000, the longest I've gotten has been about 23 min. or so before it heats up and shuts down. After about 15 min. of cooling off, I can get another 18 min. before it shuts down again. You would be better off getting a video camera to do 1 hour.

I have a Canon M. I shoot HDR but needed a lighter camera to take when doing wilderness photography to reduce weight. I purchased the Canon M but cannot find out a way to shoot RAW files in auto bracketed series. It seems the function for HDR will work only for JPEGs. The bracketing function works but I have to take each shot individually. Can anyone tell me if the Sony a6000 can auto bracket when shooting raw files so just one click will take all of the exposures? Second can you choose how many exposures to take in auto bracketing, i.e. 3 vs 5? Thank you in advance.

Both of them are true, camera can save bracketed images either in JPEG or in RAW format, HDR picture is a elaboration of those pictures, and is not RAW. If HDR picture is done in camera is JPEG, if done by computer can be any raster image (JPEG, TIFF, etc.).

hi,I'm a relative newbie.have used compact cameras,and lately borrowed a rebel 3 which I've just returned..now thinking of buying.need non professional use,just want good pictures of grandchildren.sometimes you have a potential picture of say 6 grandkids,but the chance of them all looking at camera smiling etc is very low,and can happen one in five times,so you need a really quick camera for that,ino rder to take five images one after the other.the Rebel 3 did it.compacts just dont.now to the question:should I go for a sony a600 (mirrorless) or the old technology, like a rebel t5, or t5i, or canon sl1.cost does play a part,the a600 seems to be more expensive.thanks

This indicates "Steady/Shake" ......that your likely to have a blurred image as the lens is not providing sufficient light for a good photo. The icon means that it is advisable that you do not "hand-hold" the shot with the settings you currently are using. A tri-pod is suggested, increasing your ISO to a higher setting or opening your lens wider. The camera shake warning indicator does not appear in the following situations:– The exposure mode is set to M/S, or during movie recording.– When the viewing mode is set to [No Disp. Info.], [Level], or [Histogram].

However this is a valuable warning and you should not disable it until you know the limits of your camera much more thoroughly.

Help - advice needed. Using my new a6000 tonight at a wedding; indoors, dim lights. The continuous shoots were SO SLOW, waiting for the flash to engage. How do I shoot continuous photos in areas that require flash? Thank you

you can use shutter mode with flash, setting up to 1/160. I think you have to set flash mode to ,,rear'' then. The downside is that there is no red-eye reduction anymore. I had a canon 1100 for try and the flash was much faster in auto-mode, maybe more red eyes, but still the slow auto flash from the a6000 is a bit annoying sometimes....

Just decided to post my opinion even I am starting amateur in photography. Bought A6000 body and kept the 1855 lens from my previous camera Sony NEX5R. I found the A6000 1650 kit lens too plastic. The 1855 obviously more durable. Amd I am postively surprised with images, sharp , true colores. However as I mentioned can not compare pictures from 1650 with the ones from 1855.

Was thinking about purchasing the Sony A600. Not sure now after reading reviews. I am wanting to shoot my children's sports pictures, basketball, soccer, and tennis. Can anyone recommend a good camera and lens for action photos.

i bought the a6000 despite not needing an action cam at all. if thats your aim what are you waiting for? get an a6000, i dont see too many interesting alternatives as its quite perfect for shooting action and sports.

I liked everything I read about the a6000, and was looking for a lighter carry camera than my Nikon kit, but on my second day trying it out, I was shooting a charity walk, and the lag between shutter press and snap was averaging about 3 seconds with the kit lens and the tele zoom. Just couldn't work with it for anything moving. Could have been me not having the settings right, but based on my experience it didn't work well for action.

Before you get too negative about the A-6000 from reading non-credited comments you should do yourself a service and view the Gary Fong You Tube Video on the A-6000. I think this will give you a good understanding of the merits of the A-6000. I have a friend who has been shooting high end Nikon equipment for decades. He was entralled with the A-6000 and added it to his bag for the expressed purpose of action shots. The speed at 11-FPS is remarkable and the lightness permits it to be a great all purpose camera.

Depends on how much you value the triple dial system of the NEX-7. As a manual shooter, I found it quite invaluable, and the a6000 is a tiny bit slower since you need to press a button to dial the ISO. If you're using mostly Sony lenses, definitely go for the a6000 as its phase detection AF will help a lot (though I have found the accuracy to be hit or miss). I use my Sigma trio of lenses, which are contrast-detect only, so I don't benefit as much.

Like the NEX-7, the a6000 viewfinder lags somewhat in low light (especially when compared to recent Micro 4/3rds systems). The RAW files are slightly less noisy than the NEX-7 at ISO 1600 to 6400. However, keep in mind the colours start losing accuracy faster at ISO 3200, as compared to ISO 6400 on my Canon 650D.

If you're in a hurry, get the a6000. If not, wait around and see if a true successor to the NEX-7 will come out.

totally agree with you, i've been using it for 3 months. IQ is really just average, with the huge raw file, i can't believe how bad it is, you just can't get more from the file. Kit Len 16-50 isn't too bad, very easy to use, but focusing on the long zoom kit len is slow and painful. reminds me of something from 2008...

piepie22, have you checked the firmware on the Long zoom? I had to update the firmware on mine in order to get it to focus well on the a6000. Still not as fast as the 16-50 or 18-105, but it seemed pretty fast at that point.

Olympus, no contest. Had Nex-6 and the Zeiss zoom and rented the A6000 to see if I could stay in the system and protect my lens investment. But I ended up taking a bit of a loss and bought the Oly combination you're asking about. Haven't regretted it for a second. The 6000 is easier than the Nex 6, but it's still one of the least intuitive cameras I've ever shot with. Sony IQ is great and the camera is nearly half the price, but I really hated shooting with it. Not inspiring at all. Oly user experience is familiar-once you've set the camera up for yourself (took me about 15 minutes), it's seamless. Oly IQ is terrific and unless you're blowing images up to billboard size, don't believe all the punters and pixel peepers who are dissing Micro 4/3. I make high quality 16x20 prints all the time--it's all you need.

Great question. Brand loyalty and familiarity, maybe? Fujifilm invokes images of the emulsion they sold back in the day and I simply never gave the company much consideration as a result.

Had and enjoyed using my old OM-1. Fit my hands better than the bigger, bulkier "Canikon" models and looked cooler than Pentax or Minolta's offerings to my subjective aesthetics, plus their glass has always produced nice images.

Sounds like a worthwhile experiment/experience. Already acquired an EM-1 and will be taking myself through the challenging and enjoyable process of learning the ropes of it, albeit with some help from my new camera-buddies here. Can't express enough how much I appreciate the help I've been receiving from people here. You guys are awesome.

Looked seriously at Fuji as well. Liked it for all the reasons you state, but there's limited lens selection and they're much more expensive. Bodies have a plasticky, hollow feeling build quality. Not sure why you think 4/3 is a "waste of money?" Oly is more like a Leica like than any camera I've ever shot with at about 25% of the cost. Less bulky than Fuji, and for my eye, better IQ. Not a zealot or a pixel peeper--am a working pro, have owned Nikon, Canon, Leica, Sony systems and use Canon for hardcore pro work. Oly is my personal favorite and the one that I want to pick up and shoot with all the time (and have used it for assignments, as well.)

It depends how you use it, I have a Fuji X-E2 and it doesn't feel plasticky at all but a good and solid body, there are plently of good lenses and not that much expensive for the quality they are, the zoom kit lens 18-55 f2.8-4 for example is much better than any other 18-55 f3.6-5.4, then there are the 18mm f2 abd 35mm f1.4 both are great lens.If you want spend less you can adapt many legacy lenses and the feeling with the fuji controls is awesome, I personally own a Nikkor 50mm f1.4D which is full manual and I love it! Of course it also depends of what kind of shots you like to take but if we are talking about Sony lenses Vs fuji lenses then I think fuji beat Sony.I think APS sernsors are better than 4/3 for many reason which you probably know already for example ISO noise and lens crop factor. The same reason why a full frame sensor is better than ASP.Please forgive me if you think I've wrote many stupid things, Im not a professional photographer but just amateur :)

FeDost: Nothing stupid about what you write--I'm not a zealot in any way, unlike some others who seem to deal with brand and/or technical absolutes. Different opinions are healthy. If you feel you take great pictures with a smartphone, that's fine with me. It's just that there are so many great options, that for me, resolution, pixel count are pretty much secondary to a camera that inspires you. The X-E2, X-T1 are great cameras, so are Fuji lenses--just not as intuitive or comfortable as the Oly, and certainly not the only great photo tool out there.

I am not sure if it still right time to buy a6000 because of fast release cycle so far. I don't what buy a dated camera. I heard about the rumor new "A7000" months ago. But it seems no new ILCE release in NAB 2015 :(Appreciate any updates or "rumors":)

I have the A6000 and I generally like it but it is not a good camera for bird photography because it's complicated to activate the internal zoom: you have to go into the menu and/or assign a button on the camera to use the internal zoom. This is way too time-consuming for bird photography and a huge design mistake.

The a5000 has that zoom lever and is much better to use, albeit a less developed camera than the a6000.

Overall, Sony doesn't have much to offer for bird photography but I hope they will come up with better lenses and cameras for that purpose.

Hi, im still not sure if buying the a6000 or panasonic gx7. I need it for vacation, children, it should be good in low-light and at least fit in a jacket.

I actually prefer the a6000 so far cause better grip, larger sensor and the gx7 is supposed to use too low shutter speed at Aperture mode.However, i realised on ,,new comparison tool'' that the red/blue colour-stripes from the puppets at iso 3200/low-light still have full contrast with gx7, the sony is like mud....Also the autofocus is said to be better on the gx7. There is also a touchscreen (really big advantage?) and it has an electronic noiseless shutter.

In terms of lenses the mft may be a bit smaller but i dont think its a big deal, price is almost the same i think. I wont buy huge bunch of lenses anyway, probably the sel 20 2.8 and the sel 35 1.8 for the sony.

same situation here. the a6000 is really a steal for €500. the lenses though... other than 1.8/35 and 1.8/24 (price: ouch!) i did not find a lens i fell in love. the 2.8/20 you mentioned seems like a better option (or 2.8/19 Sigma).

pro-GX7 for me would be in camera stabilizer and the silent shutter. plus if i would buy into m43s, i would not sell lenses anytime soon.

I tried the a6000 at a store again and i liked it very much (evf, grip), the panasonic wasnt there anymore unfortunately, but the decision is made....I will go with the a6000, just waiting for the a7000 coming out for price dropping....concerning lenses i hope the kit zoom and the sigma 19,30,60 is enough for me...

This camera is great! I really like that you can move/bend the flash and it will flash on ceiling instead of flashing right at faces!!! I just got the camera and noticed that the 16-55mm lens seems like not enough to zoom in. Should I get the 55-210mm lens? Or I should get some other lens? Maybe the 55-210mm doesn't do anything BUT zoom? How does the 55-210mm lens behave at dark, sport ect? I got this camera to shoot some pics at a wedding.

The 55-210mm lens doesn't cost much and does relatively much for the price ($200) It's quiet, relatively fast, but doesn't works better with the a5000 than with the a6000 because the a6000 doesn't have a lever for the internal zoom.

All better lenses are either relatively heavy or cost considerably more than the 55-210.

"The a6000 produces some very impressive image quality - at base ISO it matches the Nikon D5300 for resolution. This puts it quite some way ahead of the Fujifilm X-M1, the Canon EOS 700D/ Rebel T5i and the Olympus OM-D E-M10. "

Sony's resolution appears to be ahead of D5300 in my opinion, not a huge leap, but surely visible.

Amazon now carries a white base (body) of the Sony A6000. Does anyone know if the area where you hold on the camera will discolor over time? I'm considering in upgrading my Sony A100 (I know it's a dinosaur!) to the A6000 series.Please advice.Aloha!

Footage shot at 24p (and around 1/50th of a second shutter speed) has a distinctive appearance in terms of how motion is conveyed. It's surprising how many people recognise it as being 'cinematic' even if they can't tell you why. Conversely, faster frame rates can look more soap opera-esque.

60p, although it sounds like it's higher quality setting, may not yield the results you want. It's better at accurately representing motion, but that's not always what you want.

Equally, many cameras shoot the same bitrate, regardless of how many frames per second you shoot (which means a lower frame rate will have more data representing each individual frame), so the 24p setting may appear less compressed, too.

I'd recommend you experience with various modes. See how rolling shutter is in various modes. Rolling shutter an make a shaky video uncomfortable to watch. Usually there is less rolling shutter at higher framerates.

If you like to capture still shots from video, maybe lower frame rate is better. I have bad luck trying to capture stills from 60p video. Also, consider editing. Do you have software that edits 60 frames per second?

I'm a professional real estate photographer and I have the A6000 with the 16-50 kit lens. This camera replaces a Sony A65 with a Sigma F4-5.6 10-20 lens. I find the 6000 to be superior to the 65 in nearly every way. For my photos I find the 16-50 to be optically better than the Sigma. the 6000 does in camera lens corrections for lens distortion and color correction which greatly reduces my photography and post processing time by 30%. I know there has been lots of discussion about how bad the quality of the kit lens is but I've made very sharp 16x20 prints from it and it can go even larger.

I don't need one, I already have the sigma 10-20 and a Sony lens adapter. I only use it when I need a wider angle. I find the 16mm setting on the 16-50 to be perfect for 99% of the photos I make, there's too much perspective distortion when used any wider which most RE snappers use.

I bought the a6000 camera body last month and have been so frustrated finding a good standard zoom lens for this e-mount camera. The 16-70mm seems like the one to go but I was hoping to get one with a 2.8 aperature. Is there a sigma or tamaron lens that would work better or some other lens that isn't over $2000? I don't want to regret moving from the canons but this hunt seems so much more difficult than anticipated, and I don't necessarily want to put an adapter on which would defeat the purpose of getting this lighter weighted camera as well. Any thoughts?

You are SOL. Sorry. There are no good native options faster than 4.0. You can stick a prime on it and use it like a toy camera, and/or jump ship for another brand. Unfortunately, Sony do not support these bodies with enough good lenses to make them a primary platform for shooting. It's a huge disappointment. My girlfriend is inheriting my a6000 and I moved on to Nikon. I might have considered the Sony A7 series but their autofocus performance is not acceptable for my use.

Primes are not suitable for several situations, and they do not necessarily mean less weight. Example: if you are shooting in conditions that do not allow changing lenses on a body, shooting primes mandates carrying multiple bodies.

If you are shooting in dusty or moist environments, or one that requires you to constantly be moving, such as covering a protest, you don't want to change lenses on a body. I tried to shoot a recent night-time protest with a single a6000 body and a prime lens and missed a lot of shots I could have had with a 2.8 zoom (that focuses before water boils).

get a manual zoom with an adapter. i have a canon fdn 35-105 f 3.5 at all focal lengths. this is same hi optical quality as a prime or l glass for under 100, but it does weigh a ton. if autofocus not an issue lots of options in legacy glass.

i would use my sony 50 f18 or sigma 30f28 alternatively if the 50 is too tight. the 30 gives you 60mm at 2x zoom equiv 90mm. 2x zoom (sensor crop) is decent iq.

the 16-50mm can produce good iq. some people say its bad but it has advantages, ie one of the few wide angle autofocus options available and not so bad iq equal to any kit zoom or better. if you got it with your camera its cheap, but i would not pay 400 for it. i bought the nex 3n kit with 16-50 and 55-210 for 400 new, sold the nex 3n for 200, so i have the 2 new zooms for 100 each with my body.

More about gear in this article

In this week's episode of DPReview TV, Chris and Jordan weigh the pros and cons of three entry-level APS-C cameras: the Canon EOS M50, Sony a6000 and Fujifilm X-T100. Find out how they stack up in terms of factors like usability, autofocus and JPEG image quality.

Sony has released firmware update 3.10 for the a7R II, a7R, a7S, a7 II, a7, a6000 and a5100 camera models. The update primarily brings new lens support and is available to download now from Sony's support website. Read more

Photographer Trey Ratcliff is known for imagery that couples saturated colors with dramatic flair and cinematic subjects. Shooting HDR for nearly a decade now, his work has been featured on major networks and is even displayed at the Smithsonian Institute. Read our Q&A and take a look at more of his colorful work. Read more

Raiatea Arcuri is an avid landscape photographer who maintains a website, a blog of tutorials and gear reviews, and is constantly expanding his online portfolio. His work will soon be on display at a gallery on the Big Island of Hawaii, where he calls home. Did we mention he's only 17? Take a look at his work and read more about his journey into photography. See gallery

Sony continues to embrace the feature-adding firmware trend by adding high bitrate video recording to its a6000 mirrorless camera. Firmware v2.0 adds the ability to record in the XAVC S format to the 16-month-old camera, offering 50Mbps shooting at 24, 30, or 60p (and PAL equivalents). Aside from the updated firmware, a Class 10 SDXC card is the only other thing you'll need to get started. Read more

Latest in-depth reviews

Canon's EOS R, the company's first full-frame mirrorless camera, impresses us with its image quality and color rendition. But it also comes with quirky ergonomics, uninspiring video features and a number of other shortcomings. Read our full review to see how the EOS R stacks up in today's full-frame mirrorless market.

No Nikon camera we've tested to date balances stills and video capture as well as the Nikon Z7. Though autofocus is less reliable than the D850, Nikon's first full-frame mirrorless gets enough right to earn our recommendation.

Nikon's Coolpix P1000 has moved the zoom needle from 'absurd' to 'ludicrous,' with an equivalent focal length of 24-3000mm. While it's great for lunar and still wildlife photography, we found that it's not suited for much else.

The Nikon Z7 is slated as a mirrorless equivalent to the D850, but it can't subject track with the same reliability as its DSLR counterpart. AF performance is otherwise good, except in low light where hunting can lead to missed shots.

Latest buying guides

What's the best camera for under $500? These entry level cameras should be easy to use, offer good image quality and easily connect with a smartphone for sharing. In this buying guide we've rounded up all the current interchangeable lens cameras costing less than $500 and recommended the best.

Whether you've grown tired of what came with your DSLR, or want to start photographing different subjects, a new lens is probably in order. We've selected our favorite lenses for Sony mirrorlses cameras in several categories to make your decisions easier.

Whether you've grown tired of what came with your DSLR, or want to start photographing different subjects, a new lens is probably in order. We've selected our favorite lenses for Canon DSLRs in several categories to make your decisions easier.

Whether you've grown tired of what came with your DSLR, or want to start photographing different subjects, a new lens is probably in order. We've selected our favorite lenses for Nikon DSLRs in several categories to make your decisions easier.

What’s the best camera for less than $1000? The best cameras for under $1000 should have good ergonomics and controls, great image quality and be capture high-quality video. In this buying guide we’ve rounded up all the current interchangeable lens cameras costing under $1000 and recommended the best.

Canon's EOS R, the company's first full-frame mirrorless camera, impresses us with its image quality and color rendition. But it also comes with quirky ergonomics, uninspiring video features and a number of other shortcomings. Read our full review to see how the EOS R stacks up in today's full-frame mirrorless market.

We spoke to wildfire photographer Stuart Palley about his experiences shooting the recent Woolsey fire, why the Nikon Z7 isn't quite ready to take a permanent spot in his gear bag, and 'that' Tweet from Donald Trump.

The Z7 presented Nikon with a stiff challenge: how to build a mirrorless camera that measures up to its own DSLRs and can deliver a familiar experience to Nikon users. Chris and Jordan tell us whether they think Nikon succeeded.

Nikon has released firmware version 1.02 that resolves a flickering issue when scrolling through images, an ISO limitation problem, and an occasional crash that could occur when displaying certain Raw files.

The Insta360 One X is the company's latest consumer 360-degree camera, supporting 5.7K video, including excellent image stabilization, as well as 18MP photos. And, in our experience, it's a really fun camera to use.